Cottingham et al v. City of New York et al
| Debra Cottingham and Imani Scott |
| Novonil Chowdhury, City of New York and Sekou Bourne |
| 1:2021cv03372 |
| June 15, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Ann M Donnelly |
| Taryn A Merkl |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT JOINT (Attachments: #1 Miscellaneous Case Cover Sheet Cover Letter) (Suhovsky, Stephen) |
RESCHEDULING ORDER: The telephonic Initial Conference scheduled for 8/25/2021 at 3:15 p.m., will now be held on 8/25/2021 at 11:30 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. The parties are directed to call the toll free number at (877)336-1839. The access code is 3914302. The security code is 213372. The parties shall dial in five (5) minutes before the scheduled conference. Counsel are directed to complete the Case Management Worksheet attached to the scheduling order filed on 7/6/2021 #11 and electronically file same with the Court no later than 8/18/2021. Should the parties wish to adopt a plan for discovery different from the structure in the worksheet, they may do so only if they file a letter explaining why such a plan is appropriate in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 7/14/2021. (Chan, Kaity)
|
|
Filing 11
SCHEDULING ORDER: A telephonic Initial Conference will be held on 8/25/2021 at 3:15 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. The parties are directed to call the toll-free number (877) 336-1839. The access code is 3914302. The security code is 213372. The parties shall dial in five (5) minutes before the scheduled conference. Counsel are directed to complete the attached Case Management Worksheet and electronically file same with the Court no later than 8/18/2021. Should the parties wish to adopt a plan for discovery different from the structure in the worksheet, they may do so only if they file a letter explaining why such a plan is appropriate in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 7/6/2021. (Cahn, Gabriel)
|
|
ORDER: Motion for Extension of Time to Answer #9 is hereby granted. The deadline for the City of New York to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' complaint is extended to 8/17/2021. The deadline for individual Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' complaint is extended to 8/23/2021. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl on 7/6/2021. (Cahn, Gabriel)
|
| Filing 10 RESPONSE in Opposition re #9 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer and Requesting an Order Requiring the City to Produce as Initial Disclosures, Together with its Response to the Complaint, the Affidavit Presented to the Warrant-Issuing Magistrate and all NYPD Documentation in Support Thereof. filed by Debra Cottingham, Imani Scott. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit CBS-TV Report of April 13, 2021, #2 Exhibit Daily News Report of April 15, 2021) (Berger, Joel) |
| Filing 9 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by City of New York. (Suhovsky, Stephen) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Stephen Matthew Suhovsky on behalf of City of New York (aty to be noticed) (Suhovsky, Stephen) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Debra Cottingham, Imani Scott. Sekou Bourne served on 6/23/2021, answer due 7/14/2021. (Berger, Joel) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Debra Cottingham, Imani Scott. Novonil Chowdhury served on 6/23/2021, answer due 7/14/2021. (Berger, Joel) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Debra Cottingham, Imani Scott. City of New York served on 6/17/2021, answer due 7/8/2021. (Berger, Joel) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Sekou Bourne, Novonil Chowdhury, City of New York. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons) (Davis, Kimberly) |
| Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Davis, Kimberly) |
| Filing 2 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Davis, Kimberly) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Ann M Donnelly and Magistrate Judge Taryn A. Merkl. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Davis, Kimberly) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANYEDC-14567466 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -NO,, filed by Debra Cottingham, Imani Scott. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Proposed Summons, #4 Proposed Summons) (Berger, Joel) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
